The Problem With Trying To Regulate Guns Is ....

America has to do more to prevent gun violence - The Washington Post: 

The late Jimmy Durante is famous for saying:

 "Everybody Wants ta Get In To da Act!"

It's the age-old complaint of professionals vs amateurs.  (Or, here .. people who know what they're talking about vs those who haven't actually 'thought it through'.)

GUN CONTROL is like that:  Everybody has an idea, an opinion, and a computer.  Geez!
Some times, I think that there are some people who shouldn't have access to a computer and the internet connection.  It's like giving MATCHES, or a gun and ammunition to a child ... you never know what's going to happen next but you're pretty sure you're not going to like it!  (SATIRE ALERT)

Here's a couple of comments on the WAPO opinion article listed above:

lerobinsontff 9/2/2015 6:05 PM PDT OK.  You don't like the term "gun show loop hole".  Would you then support closing the private sale loop hole. 
LikeShare2 TeddieK 9/2/2015 6:18 PM PDT @lerobinsontff - The problem with trying to regulate private sales is that there is no database of who owns what. 

The first comment was in reference to the fact that only dealers are required to 'vet' purchasers.  Which means that a criminal can be prevented from buying a gun from a dealer ... but not from a private individual.

Some states are working to close that "gun show loophole" by requiring private sales to also
'vet' purchasers, not necessarily by directly using access to the NCIS but by going through a dealer for this process.

The good thing about this is singular: every private transaction is (by design) subject to confirmation by NCIS.   Which keeps criminals and crazy people from buying guns on the private market ...which is also called the "Secondary Market".

The bad thing about this is the multiple consequences of the process:

1. it imposes the government into the process of a private transaction
2. it is not possible  to track transactions without definitively identifying the gun, which means that the serial number must be included in the paper trail ... which is tantamount to Registration.   Gun owners don't like Registration, because it's nobody's business but our own.  Well, that and also that it is the precursor to confiscation and other Bad Things.
3. If you need to get the Government involved, it's going to cost you money.  Well, SOMEONE has to run the NCIS process, and around here in Geekistan it's going to cost you around $50 for a dealer to run the paperwork.  This is ipso facto a tax on the transfer of firearms.  Gun owners don't like taxes, either .... especially when the sole purpose of the 'fee' is to support a regulatory process which we don't like anyway.
4. Trust and Honor.   My government doesn't trust my honor?  Okay, that's a wash;  I don't trust my government either, because they keep chipping away at the Bill of Rights.
5. WILL NOT COMPLY!  It's an extension of (4) .... If I think that the government is going to collect data based on these background checks, and if I'm a Cranky Old Poop (which I'm not, but I do know a few good, honest folks who are), I'm not going to abide by this unconstitutional law.  Which would make a criminal out of an honest person.  I'm not very smart, but this doesn't look like the thing that a Government that wants me to trust them would do.  It certainly doesn't engender a warm, fuzzy image of my Government in my heart.
6. Finally, and the most important thing is ... why does your want to oversee Secondary Market Sales?   Because they want to keep crazies and criminals from buying guns?   Does anybody think that Crazies and Criminals are so STUPID that they would buck the system?  First, Crazies aren't prevented because there is no database which identifies them (Patient Privacy Laws).  Criminals just steal the guns .. why should they pay Street Price for a gun they can get for free?  Hell, they're already criminals!

So, back to the original comments:

GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE:  Alternative is ipso facto registration of guns by serial number, because it cannot be regulated without that. have a problem with that.  Registration is the first step toward confiscation, and I don't believe the folks who say "we don't want to take your guns", because as soon as they day that ... you know that's exactly what they want.  They think they're being honest, but they're lying; they just want you to own guns that they think are 'acceptable'.  In the long run, no guns are acceptable to those who want to regulate them.

They're not worried about 'you', just the 'bad guys'.  But to them, every gun owner is a 'bad guy'.  To wit: the terminology of their description of gun owners is demeaning and dismissive.  "GUN NUT" is the least offensive of the bunch.

DATABASE OF WHO OWNS GUNS: oh yeah, we're going to register every gun in the country?  I don't think so. [eye-roll]   Because Confiscation.   Do we REALLY want the government to have a list of every gun in America?  Some people (such as the folks in the original thesis) think that would be a good idea.

That could have egregious consequences for The Little Guys in America.  Not today, maybe.  But ... until Tyranny.  Which some folks think is looming over us today. 

 (Not me, of course: I'm apolitical!)

PS: You may think I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.  I visualize a society that protects my constitutional rights under the second, fourth, ninth AND fourteenth amendments.